Where's that right-to-work flood of new jobs for the state? - GUEST OPINION: March 10

FILE--In this Dec. 11, 2012 file photo, a protester, wearing a Michigan Education Association helmet, walks past Michigan State Police at the State Capitol in Lansing, Mich.The crowd was protesting right-to-work legislation that passed the Michigan legisislature. Some public universities and school districts are negotiating long contract extensions before Michigan's right-to-work law takes effect in a month. It is a way for unions to keep collecting dues or fees for years to come. But Republican lawmakers may have a way to thwart the actions: the power of the purse. They may decide to give less state aid to those public employers who try doing an end-around the right-to-work law. (AP Photo/Paul Sancya)

Just about a year ago, I wrote a three-part report about the impending state debate over right-to- work.

In that piece, I interviewed state lawmakers from both sides of the debate, union people and reviewed reports concerning the issue, its pros and cons and consequences.

When I wrote the series, the chances of a statewide ballot on the issue was still being discussed in union halls.

Advertisement

It was being quietly dismissed by Gov. Rick Snyder, who hoped it wouldn't get that far, even though he had escalated the debate last March 16 by signing into law Public Act 53, which prohibited public schools from deducting union dues or service fees from employees' paychecks.

Nevertheless, the governor said at the time that right-to-work was "too divisive" an issue for the state.

Still, one who felt strongly at the time that right-to-work was right for Michigan was state Sen. Patrick Colbeck, R-Canton Township.

"We're the only state to have lost population in the last census," the first-term state senator said a year ago. "And the people we lost moved to right-to-work states; they followed the jobs.

"And that means we've seen families split up because of that," he said then. "And that's not acceptable."

But the senator didn't stop there: "When I rank all the things that can bring jobs to our state, right-to-work is at the top of that list.

"We need to compete with states -- some now on our own borders -- that are more competitive than we are.

"The inconvenient truth," he said, "is that jobs are growing in right-to-work states and declining in non-right-to-work states."

For Colbeck, the mainstream definition of right-to-work was right on target: "Right-to-work is a misnomer; everyone does have a right to work."

But the senator said then that the issue wasn't about unions, it was about bringing jobs to Michigan.

This brings us all to today -- just about a year later -- and the fallout over the use of the award-winning, feel-good "Pure Michigan" tourism campaign to tout right-to-work.

In case you haven't been paying attention, the Michigan Economic Development Corp. came under fire by using the Pure Michigan logo in advertising on the East Coast.

Specifically, in an ad in the Wall Street Journal that told Corporate America that a right-to-work Michigan was open for business.

Almost without exception, Michiganders everywhere love the Pure Michigan ads, narrated by our own Tim Allen and featuring some of the most beautiful images possible of our great state.

But then the MEDC decided to spend $144,000 to make a link between our pristine waterways wrapping through picturesque landscapes and one of the most divisive issues in our state's history.

Because of the outcry over the linkage, the MEDC pulled further advertising, except that -- according to reports from Lansing -- the MEDC announced it will continue its advertising of the state's emerging business climate, including the new right-to-work law.

The only question that remains is whether it will still be linked to the Pure Michigan campaign.

"We are still making an assessment on whether it makes sense to include the Pure Michigan logo in the ads," Mike Finney, president and CEO of the MEDC, said in one media report.

"We'll decide in the next two weeks or so."

And that's where Sen. Colbeck comes in: He's "urging Finney to keep telling the story of Michigan's new law, proudly and loudly," as one new report wrote.

"I want to make sure that story gets told," he's reported as saying. "Don't get bullied into stopping telling that story."

But what story is that, precisely, Sen. Colbeck?

Is it the story that by becoming a right-to-work state, Michigan is enjoying a flood of new businesses landing at our door?

That can't be right, because it seems every business survey shows that such a law is well down the list for any company considering a location in which to settle or grow.

Besides, I haven't seen any flood of any kind of new businesses even though we now have right-to-work plus tax breaks galore that have been given away to the business sector.

Where's that flood of new jobs, governor, senator?

Or is the story one simply of gloating, of spiking the ball, of flaunting a victory, of relishing a Republican majority in Lansing?

I suspect that's the real story for some. Please, go ahead and gloat and do a touchdown dance, if you must, but leave Pure Michigan alone.

That simple phrase means something to the rest of us, something wonderful even if it means only a political prop to some of you.

Craig Farrand is a former managing editor of The News-Herald Newspapers. He can be reached at c_farrand@yahoo.com.